UPDATED: Court rejects Nnamdi Kanu‘s no-case submission, orders him to enter defence

The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Friday, dismissed the no-case submission filed by the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra.

Justice James Omotosho, in a ruling on Friday, held that the Department of State Services has made out a prima facie case against Kanu.

He accordingly ordered Kanu to enter his defence, as the prosecution has being able to convince the court without reasonable doubt that he has case to answer in the alleged terrorism charge brought against him by the Federal Government.

Justice Omotosho held that the evidence presented by the Department of State Services through its five witnesses was such that there was a need for Kanu to provide some explanations in the charge brought against him.

“This is not to say the defendant is guilty as charged, but he is being accorded a right to a fair hearing to prove his innocence,” Omotosho said.

“The defendant is still innocent until proven guilty, and the prosecution still has a duty to prove its terrorism and treasonable felony allegations beyond reasonable doubt.

“The Court, however, holds that the defendant has to provide an explanation in view of the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses against him”.

Justice Omotosho also held that no evidence of extraordinary rendition to Nigeria was provided by Nnamdi Kanu’s legal team during the prosecution’s trial.

“This no-case submission by Nnamdi Kanu is overruled,” the judge declared.

The defendant is to enter his defence,” Justice Omotosho added.

Kanu had filed a no-case submission after the prosecution closed its case in June, insisting that he has no case to answer in the charge brought against him.

Meanwhile, the Court has given the Nigerian Medical Association eight days to constitute a team of medical experts to determine the health status of Kanu.

In a ruling, Justice Omotosho ordered the NMA President to submit the committee’s report within eight days for consideration on whether Kanu should be transferred to the National Hospital for treatment.

Justice Omotosho directed that the committee, among other tasks, should assess the Department of State Services hospital to confirm whether it has the capacity to meet Kanu’s health needs.

Justice Omotosho further ruled that the NMA committee would be at liberty to make use of any hospital in the country for its investigations. He specified that the panel should comprise between eight and ten NMA members, including a cardiologist and a neurologist. The Chief Medical Director of the National Hospital must also be part of the committee.

The decision followed conflicting medical reports presented by the DSS medical team and Kanu’s private consultants.

The DSS lead counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo, disclosed the NMA’s intervention while opposing an application by Kanu’s legal team for his transfer to the National Hospital for urgent treatment.

Awomolo explained that a team of medical experts had already visited Kanu in DSS custody to assess his health, adding that the DSS medical team, led by Dr Mohammed Nasir, maintained that his condition could be adequately managed within DSS facilities.

In contrast, Kanu’s private consultants, led by Professor Martin Aghaji, a retired professor of medicine from the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, argued that his deteriorating health required urgent transfer to the National Hospital, and even suggested possible treatment abroad.

The DSS dismissed Aghaji’s report as exaggerated and suspicious, particularly for recommending foreign hospitals, and alleged that he had unilaterally altered Kanu’s medication without consulting DSS doctors who had been treating him for four years.

Awomolo further argued that transferring Kanu to the National Hospital would disrupt services and pose security risks, insisting that the federal government was committed to his safety and willing to allow him access to medical experts of his choice within DSS facilities.

Kanu’s lead counsel, Dr Onyechi Ikpeazu, however, maintained that the transfer request was based on Aghaji’s findings. He stressed that the DSS lacked the facilities to manage Kanu’s ailments and argued that it was in the interest of justice that Kanu remain alive to face the terrorism charges against him.

ADVERTISEMENT

Ikpeazu added that his team would not oppose the NMA’s intervention, provided it was ordered by the court.

The court adjourned the matter till October 8.